VERDICT WATCH MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #36 Retrial

[Tortoise]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934616438872150497

 

[Forest_Wood]

Yanetti made a comment to the judge who insists on something profora on the verdict form ...he said that even though it is the standard it may not be the easiest and best for a jury to understand. Seems lilke this form has limitations but until they actually revise it judge is using it. I think she can deviate but runs the risk of appeal?

I don't know how much authority BC has to change a standard form used by the entire state of MA? Wouldn't that have to be a decision at the state government level and not changed just for her individual trial? Her hands might be tied on that request.
MOO

 

[Forest_Wood]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934616438872150497

Somebody lost their shoe just walking backwards, strolling around ...

 

[Tortoise]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934581932152504632

 

[missy1974]

Yeah he was an expert the judge refused. The defense wanted him for their hybrid Bowden defense (sub standard investigation with potential suspect s ignored). They raised that ruling with the judge again the day before closings when nutting out specific jury instructions.

This is interesting so far ..
The lack of response for an officer that died was shocking to him.

The lack of experience from LE.. the leaf blower, the solo cups, no preservation of the crime scene, the lack of chain of custody of everything. How they had to piece together the crime scene because no one did it properly.

The investigative process.. lacked a process. The pressure to find a suspect right away, plays into confirmation bias.

He even says that the investigation was over by 11pm that day. He says even in the 2nd trial, they are still trying to figure out what happened. Regarding the ME.. he says when the ME says it's not from being hit by a vehicle, it's the investigators job to try to investigate to give her the information to change her mind (obviously didn't happen here).

He says that there is more to be investigate, reluctant to share until there is a verdict (because if there is a 3rd trial, he says they will have more info)

He explains it more then I am saying.. but that is what I'm hearing so far.

 

[Soulmagent]

Somebody lost their shoe just walking backwards, strolling around ...

That sounds like a Crock.

 

[jepop]

Yanetti made a comment to the judge who insists on something profora on the verdict form ...he said that even though it is the standard it may not be the easiest and best for a jury to understand. Seems lilke this form has limitations but until they actually revise it judge is using it. I think she can deviate but runs the risk of appeal?

I got that vibe too because she said she wanted case law from MA. But, wow, it's time they updated it. Does not make sense that I can see (though INAL) either in terms of fairness or wasting time and boat loads of money/resources to retry on the full count.

 

[ShadyLady]

She is all in on an appeal market anyway. Go for gold ,BEV.

Yanetti made a comment to the judge who insists on something profora on the verdict form ...he said that even though it is the standard it may not be the easiest and best for a jury to understand. Seems lilke this form has limitations but until they actually revise it judge is using it. I think she can deviate but runs the risk of appeal?

Does this judge count on pleas by intimidation for most cases?

Less work for her?

 

[turaj]

I don't know how much authority BC has to change a standard form used by the entire state of MA? Wouldn't that have to be a decision at the state government level and not changed just for her individual trial? Her hands might be tied on that request.
MOO

I think Yanetti would not waste his time unless she had the authority to modify it. She asked for case law and maybe he found some and that is what he gave her this morning. Again if she is asking for case law she has the ability to modify. If this is another hung jury that well might be the reason again.

 

[Wishbone]

Defence produced not a scintilla of evidence of anyone either obtaining or planting evidence.

Most defendants come up with ridiculous theories to explain away their involvement in crimes. Juries aren't allowed to speculate. A whispering defence attorney isn't evidence.

Taillight plastic was found at the scene of the accident while Proctor was at the sallyport.

MOO

Extra pieces of taillight were also sent to the lab that did not belong to the Lexus taillight.

 

[turaj]

I got that vibe too because she said she wanted case law from MA. But, wow, it's time they updated it. Does not make sense that I can see (though INAL) either in terms of fairness or wasting time and boat loads of money/resources to retry on the full count.

Having confusing instructions or worse yet verdict slip is costing the CW tons of taxpayer money.

 

[Soulmagent]

It also boggles my mind that SOMEONE moved that ford edge out there at some point in the middle of the night so that it was parked directly in front of where JO was supposedly lying there in the yard since 12:30am…. then moved it again prior to his body being discovered…. yet they didn’t see his body. That’s not strange at all.

It's a little odd to think JOK just got out the car and died. Even I forget he had direct interaction with the environment. We have no idea or a TOD , SO MAYBE john moved that suv there....'
I did not follow season 1 . I would not of followed it at all but its stank oozed over to my attention.

 

[jepop]

It has been changed from the last trial yes.

Yeah, it's different. Last year the jury were confused over how to ng on charges 1 and 3, which by all accounts they agreed she was ng.

The judge made the instructions clear this year and the ng boxes are there at the top of each charge for them to tick. She also instructed them to render verdicts separately for each charge. There was a problem last year, the jury seem to have not known they could do this, not sure about the slip but I think it was poorly rendered but I also think the instructions were not clear.

I believe count 2 is in the same form as last year and this is the count they were hung on, but I'm not aware of how they were hung with all those lesser options. That is what Yanetti wanted to clarify this time. But the separate charges and voting method are clarified and remedied from last year so that's something. So they can be done with the murder count ( Ng Imo) and move on. Jmo.

 

[Warwick7]

The shards weren't swabbed. See Yanetti's cross of Andre Porto.

Scientists don't introduce biological material into evidence, it's swabbed and tested in the lab.

MOO

BBM
This sentence irritates me.

So, far as I know, no actual photos were taken of John where he was found.

According to testimony:

No actual measurements were taken.

There are also very few photos of the taillight pieces collected at scene over the following 3 weeks. No actual measured or marked locations for those pieces either.

At the start, the scene was never secured and no taillight pieces were found until the evening, after her car had already been collected.

And it was testified there was NO chain of custody documented for shards and clothing. Without the all important chain of custody, anyone anywhere can tamper with these items.

 

[ChasingKaty]

Were any shards found on John O'Keefe/his clothing, or was it all on the ground at the crime scene?

 

[arielilane]

@JulieCourtTV


A sweet reminder of who the victim is - Officer John O’Keefe!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934612971289719267

 

[Soulmagent]

Yeah, it's different. Last year the jury were confused over how to ng on charges 1 and 3, which by all accounts they agreed she was ng.

The judge made the instructions clear this year and the ng boxes are there at the top of each charge for them to tick. She also instructed them to render verdicts separately for each charge. There was a problem last year, the jury seem to have not known they could do this, not sure about the slip but I think it was poorly rendered but I also think the instructions were not clear.

I believe count 2 is in the same form as last year and this is the count they were hung on, but I'm not aware of how they were hung with all those lesser options. That is what Yanetti wanted to clarify this time. But the separate charges and voting method are clarified and remedied from last year so that's something. So they can be done with the murder count ( Ng Imo) and move on. Jmo.

The last jury really wanted to not let her off the drinking and driving issue.
The jury guy VINNIE p talked to seemed to believe that they were going to find her guilty of "something" but not his death.
The logic is stunning.

 

[missy1974]

Yeah, it's different. Last year the jury were confused over how to ng on charges 1 and 3, which by all accounts they agreed she was ng.

The judge made the instructions clear this year and the ng boxes are there at the top of each charge for them to tick. She also instructed them to render verdicts separately for each charge. There was a problem last year, the jury seem to have not known they could do this, not sure about the slip but I think it was poorly rendered but I also think the instructions were not clear.

I believe count 2 is in the same form as last year and this is the count they were hung on, but I'm not aware of how they were hung with all those lesser options. That is what Yanetti wanted to clarify this time. But the separate charges and voting method are clarified and remedied from last year so that's something. So they can be done with the murder count ( Ng Imo) and move on. Jmo.

hmmm I'm not so sure the slip changed at all from last year... there is no "not guilty" to check off. I think this is what the defense is saying was an issue last year.. and potential for it again this trial?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934611981073318128

 

[Soulmagent]

The shards weren't swabbed. See Yanetti's cross of Andre Porto.

Scientists don't introduce biological material into evidence, it's swabbed and tested in the lab.

MOO

She probably looked into that bags of grass , plastic, glass ,an underwear and thunk...to herself
That she would rather be at home stepping on lego's.

 

[Tortoise]

Extra pieces of taillight were also sent to the lab that did not belong to the Lexus taillight.

I'll agree to disagree on that. Ash Vallier testified that when she said they were not matched she meant their edges were not a mechanical fit, which is understandable given that a lot of pieces were too small to reconstruct. IMO

3.17.35